Preservation of periprosthetic bone with a collum-fixated short stem versus conventional metaphyseal-fixated stems in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial with 2-year follow-up in 61 patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2026.46481Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Bone, Hip, Implants, OsteoarthrosisAbstract
Background and purpose: We aimed to compare the effect of 2 femoral stem designs on periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD) after total hip arthroplasty in a randomized controlled trial. We hypothesized that a short collum-fixated stem (Primoris) would better preserve proximal BMD than a conventional metaphyseal-fixated and diaphyseal engaging stem (Echo).
Methods: 61 patients with primary osteoarthritis were randomized to receive either the Primoris (n = 31) or Echo (n = 30) uncemented femoral stem. DXA scans were performed preoperatively, at 6 weeks, 12 months, and 24 months. The prespecified primary outcome was periprosthetic BMD at 24 months and patient-reported outcomes (EQ-5D, Oxford Hip Score, FJS-12) were collected preoperatively, and at each follow-up were secondary.
Results: At 24 months, model-based estimates showed significantly higher BMD in the Primoris group than in the Echo group in Gruen zones 3 (mean difference 0.40 g/cm², 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26–0.53; P < 0.001), 5 (0.20 g/cm², CI 0.07–0.33; P = 0.003), and 7 (0.27 g/cm², CI 0.14–0.41; P < 0.001). These differences corresponded to relative differences of +19.1%, +9.1%, and +14.3%, respectively, compared with the Echo group. In addition, the increase in BMD from 6 weeks to 24 months was significantly greater in the Primoris group in Gruen zone 7 (mean difference in change 0.18 g/cm², CI 0.04–0.32; P = 0.01). PROMs improved similarly in both groups, with no statistically significant between-group differences.
Conclusion: At 2 years, the collum-fixated Primoris stem preserved more proximal femoral bone than the Echo stem, while PROMs were comparable between groups. The observed preservation of proximal bone stock may be advantageous for long-term bone maintenance and future revision surgery.
Downloads
References
Learmonth I D, Young C, Rorabeck C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet 2007; 370(9597): 1508-19. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60457-7
Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89(4): 780-5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00222
Engh C A, Bobyn J D, Glassman A H. Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1987; 69(1): 45-55. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4471-5451-8_12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.69B1.3818732
Sheth N P, Nelson C L, Paprosky W G. Femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2013; 21(10): 601-12. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-21-10-601. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-21-10-601
Rasmussen MB, El-Galaly A, Daugberg L, Nielsen P T, Jakobsen T. Projection of primary and revision hip arthroplasty surgery in Denmark from 2020 to 2050. Acta Orthop 2022; 93(1): 849-53. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2022.5255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2022.5255
Stulberg S D, Patel R M. The short stem: promises and pitfalls. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B(11): 57-62. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32936. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.32936
Tjønneland A, Nielsen P T, Jakobsen T. Biomechanics of a collum-fixated short stem in total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop 2024; 52: 61-6.doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.02.027. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jor.2024.02.027
Nielsen M P, Christensen J D, Jakobsen T, Nielsen P T. An ultra-short stemless femoral hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg 2025; 107(14): 1590-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.24.00844. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.24.00844
Christiansen J D, Laursen M, Blunn G W, Nielsen P T. Stable fixation of an ultra-short femoral neck-preserving hip prosthesis: a 5-year RSA, DXA, and clinical prospective outcome study of 48 patients. Acta Orthop 2024; 95: 138-46. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2024.40074. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.40074
Salemyr M, Muren O, Ahl T, Bodén H, Eisler T, Stark A, et al. Lower periprosthetic bone loss and good fixation of an ultra-short stem compared to a conventional stem in uncemented total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2015; 86(6): 659-66. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1067087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1067087
Kold S, Rahbek O, Vestermark M, Overgaard S, Søballe K. Bone compaction enhances fixation of weightbearing titanium implants. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 431(431): 138-44. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000150461.69142.f3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000150461.69142.f3
Christiansen J D, Ejaz A, Nielsen P T, Laursen M. An ultra-short femoral neck-preserving hip prosthesis: a 2-year follow-up study with radiostereometric analysis and dual X-ray absorptiometry in a stepwise introduction. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2020; 102(2): 128-36. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.19.00104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00104
Khanuja H S, Banerjee S, Jain D, Pivec R, Mont M A. Short bone-conserving stems in cementless hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96(20): 1742-52. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00780. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.M.00780
Rosenthall L, Bobyn J D, Brooks C E. Temporal changes of periprosthetic bone density in patients with a modular noncemented femoral prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14(1): 71-6. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(99)90205-x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-5403(99)90205-X
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Anders Tjønneland, Janus D Christiansen, Thomas Jakobsen, Poul T Nielsen

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
PlumX (by Elsevier) is an altmetrics platform that tracks and visualizes the online attention, usage, captures, citations, and social media engagement.
